D&D 5E Adding Skills to Saves

[Rune]

So, I'm thinking of allowing PCs to add proficiency to a save if a relevant skill might help them make the save.

Since it would be situational, it shouldn't step on the toes of actual saving throw proficiencies too much.

Additionally, it should help narrow (eleminate) the gap in later levels between non-proficient saves and DCs.

Discuss.

 

[Dausuul]

So, I'm thinking of allowing PCs to add proficiency to a save if a relevant skill might help them make the save.

Since it would be situational, it shouldn't step on the toes of actual saving throw proficiencies too much.

Additionally, it should help narrow (eleminate) the gap in later levels between non-proficient saves and DCs.

Discuss.

I like it in theory, but not sure how you'd execute it in practice. What would be an example?

 

[Mouseferatu]

I wouldn't. It won't be situational. I'm having a hard time coming up with too many Dex saves that wouldn't be helped with Acrobatics.

What about rogues' expertise? Or the fighter ability that lets you add half your bonus to skill checks for Strength that you're not proficient in? Does Arcana help you save against spells?

Are you willing to have this discussion/debate every time someone has to make a save in-game? To me, that seems the likeliest outcome in even the best of groups.

I'd recommend against it.

 

[Rune]

I like it in theory, but not sure how you'd execute it in practice. What would be an example?

Like, for example, using athletics to help resist a push, or medicine to resist poison.

 

[Rune]

I wouldn't. It won't be situational. I'm having a hard time coming up with too many Dex saves that wouldn't be helped with Acrobatics.

What about rogues' expertise? Or the fighter ability that lets you add half your bonus to skill checks for Strength that you're not proficient in? Does Arcana help you save against spells?

Are you willing to have this discussion/debate every time someone has to make a save in-game? To me, that seems the likeliest outcome in even the best of groups.

I'd recommend against it.

Yeah. I'm okay with all that.

I actually prefer players feel their skills can be used reactively. Makes them seem more organic.

I don't think expertise is really an issue, either. The classes that have it should rarely fail related saves.

As for the discussion/debate: I'm not interested in why a skill should apply.

I want to know specifically what the PC is doing to apply the skill.

 

[Dausuul]

I would do it a little differently: You, the player, tell me what you're doing. I, the DM, decide what skill is applicable, if any. Say you're diving behind a treasure chest to avoid a dragon's breath--sounds good, you can roll Acrobatics. Grabbing a giant-sized shield out of the dragon's hoard and heaving it up in front of you? Roll Athletics. Standing in the open doing back flips? Yeah, sorry, that doesn't help you. Make your Dex save like normal.

On reflection, I think I'd also make it so that you expend your reaction for such rolls, and you roll both the skill and your regular save. Make either of them, and you make the saving throw. That way, even if your applicable saving throw is better than the skill you're using, you're still rewarded for creative play.

 

[KarinsDad]

I would do it a little differently: You, the player, tell me what you're doing. I, the DM, decide what skill is applicable, if any. Say you're diving behind a treasure chest to avoid a dragon's breath--sounds good, you can roll Acrobatics. Grabbing a giant-sized shield out of the dragon's hoard and heaving it up in front of you? Roll Athletics. Standing in the open doing back flips? Yeah, sorry, that doesn't help you. Make your Dex save like normal.

On reflection, I think I'd also make it so that you expend your reaction for such rolls, and you roll both the skill and your regular save. Make either of them, and you make the saving throw. That way, even if your applicable saving throw is better than the skill you're using, you're still rewarded for creative play.

Just seems like a way to game the system. I'd recommend against it.

PCs have hit points to mitigate damage and I think that players who put an 8 in Wisdom should get charmed a lot. It also gives players reasons to take certain defensive spells. IMO.

 

[Rune]

I would do it a little differently: You, the player, tell me what you're doing. I, the DM, decide what skill is applicable, if any. Say you're diving behind a treasure chest to avoid a dragon's breath--sounds good, you can roll Acrobatics. Grabbing a giant-sized shield out of the dragon's hoard and heaving it up in front of you? Roll Athletics. Standing in the open doing back flips? Yeah, sorry, that doesn't help you. Make your Dex save like normal.

I like it.

On reflection, I think I'd also make it so that you expend your reaction for such rolls, and you roll both the skill and your regular save. Make either of them, and you make the saving throw. That way, even if your applicable saving throw is better than the skill you're using, you're still rewarded for creative play.

Interesting. Not so sure I would want two rolls that were essentially the same ability check, but I do like charging a reaction to add skill proficiency to a save. Kind of aliviates some concerns about skills that are not so situational.

 

[Rune]

Just seems like a way to game the system. I'd recommend against it.

PCs have hit points to mitigate damage and I think that players who put an 8 in Wisdom should get charmed a lot. It also gives players reasons to take certain defensive spells. IMO.

It's not really gaming the system if the assumption is that most saves will have proficiency.

What it does instead is encourage a cinematic style of play (through both descriptions and survivability).

 

[Umbran]

My thought is simply this - if you add your skill, it is no longer a save, it is a skill check.

Which you can do. There now is no such thing as a save - everything is a skill check. But it will create a notable disparity between have and have-nots, possibly pushing some skills that are likely to be overused in save scenarios (like, say, Acrobatics) into a "must-have" category.

Now I am a "don't fix it if it ain't broke" kind of person. So, I come to asking - what is mechanically broken that it calls for this mechanical change?